Jim Miller on Politics

Pseudo-Random Thoughts

Cougar Family Reunion? That's what biologists think was
happening in this series of photos.
(You can see larger versions
of the pictures in
this post.)

The biologists think this may have been a family reunion because, though cougars are usually solitary,
mothers do get together with their daughters occasionally, and sometimes bring their current
batch of cubs to these meetings.

(Douglas County is close to the
center of
Washington state; Moses Coulee is rather barren place, with a very interesting
ice-age history.)

The politician who once best exemplified the idea of a "maverick" independent has shifted so far
to the right that he is now tied for the title of the Senate's most conservative member, according
to National Journal's 2010 vote ratings.

According to a comprehensive examination of 96 Senate votes taken in 2010, Sen. John McCain,
R-Ariz., along with seven of his colleagues, voted most often on the conservative side. His
89.7 composite conservative score ties him with stalwarts like Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and gives
him a more conservative score than Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

The National Journal goes on to argue that McCain and other Republicans have shifted
right. But it is at least as plausible to conclude that the Democratic party has been trying to
pass a far-left agenda that almost all Republicans, even the few moderates, oppose.

(I hesitate to mention this, but McCain may be freer to be himself again, now that George W.
Bush is no longer in the White House. Like almost everyone else, I think that some of
their disagreements were personal, that McCain never forgave Bush for the 2000
nomination campaign.)

Why Are The Democrats Backing The Public Service Unions So Strongly?
Michael Barone
answers that question.

Enormous contributions, yes -- to the Democratic Party and the Obama campaign. Unions,
most of whose members are public employees, gave Democrats some $400 million in the 2008
election cycle. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the
biggest public employee union, gave Democrats $90 million in the 2010 cycle.

Follow the money, Washington reporters like to say. The money in this case comes from
taxpayers, present and future, who are the source of every penny of dues paid to public employee
unions, who in turn spend much of that money on politics, almost all of it for Democrats.
In effect, public employee unions are a mechanism by which every taxpayer is forced to fund
the Democratic Party.

And the unions didn't just give money; they gave thousands of hours of volunteer time in, for instance,
get-out-the-vote campaigns.

It is odd, sometimes, to read "mainstream" accounts of Republican counter-attacks against the
public service unions. The "mainstream" journalists seem not to understand that when a
union spends millions to defeat a candidate, that candidate is unlikely to look kindly on the union,
afterwards.

Obamacare is not being enforced equally at all. As of February 9, the Obama administration
had granted 915 waivers, mainly to influential organizations, major companies, and pro-Democratic
labor unions. Those less lucky or less well connected have a different option: Obey
Obamacare.
. . .
Major waiver recipients and their enrollees include the Carpenters Health and Welfare Fund
(20,500), Service Employees International Union Local 25 (31,000), Darden Restaurants (34,000),
Aetna (209,423), CIGNA (265,000), and the United Federation of Teachers (351,000).
Union members represent 43.1 percent of the 2,443,047 enrollees included in these waivers.

(Emphasis added.)

Political machines have always relied on their ability to pass out favors, to be blunt their ability to
replace the rule of law with the rule of the organization. Obama and many of his advisors
learned their trade from the Chicago machine, so this pattern should not surprise us.

(I suspect that many of those receiving waivers were also big Obama donors.)

Including Nukes? President Obama said that he has asked
his administration to prepare a
"full range of options"
to respond to the Libyan crisis.

So, naturally, I wondered whether he meant that, because the "full range" would necessarily include
nuclear weapons. And, in the past, that phrase and similar phrases have often been used to
hint at the possible use of nuclear weapons.

Now I don't think that's what Obama intended to say, and that certainly isn't what he should have
said. Most likely he was just talking big in order to make up for his relative silence on the
Libyan crisis. But as president, he really needs to be more careful in what he says.

When Baseball Bats Are Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Have Baseball Bats:
Think I am joking? Then you don't know
Sweden.

Sweden's Supreme Court (Högsta Domstolen - HD) is to consider whether wielding a baseball bat
in a public place is against the law.
. . .
According to Swedish law the possession of dangerous items such as knives, and other weapons
"designed to be used as a weapon in crimes against life or limb", are not permitted in a
public place.

The defendant in the case has argued that a baseball bat is not covered by the law and pointed out
that it has a number of other uses.

The appeals court however based its rejection of his appeal on the grounds that he kept it on
apparent display in his car, and thus can be construed to conform to the legal definition of a
dangerous item.

The man had been assaulted twice before, and was carrying the bat for protection.

The Swedes, like many leftist Americans, do not think people have an inherent right to protect
themselves.

(The case isn't quite as crazy as it might seem. In many parts of Europe, baseball bats are popular
among young thugs, but not because they are planning to hit baseballs with them.

The defendant was arrested in Malmö, a southern Swedish city with a very high
crime rate.)

Organic Versus Conventional Vegetables: A British consumer
organization did some tests; the Telegraph reports the
results.

Organic vegetables are less tasty and contain fewer nutrients than normally-grown produce, according
to a leading consumer watchdog.

(I am always tempted to call conventional foods "inorganic" — or to protest that nearly all of
our foods are "organic". There are a few exceptions like artificial sweeteners, but not
many.)

The tests sound reasonable, and are consistent with other findings that I have seen.

(The consumer organization is Which?. They are
quite similar to the American
Consumer Reports. Among
other things, both organizations prefer to sell their results, rather than giving them away for free, so
their web sites are not particularly informative.)

Sometimes it's necessary to get out on the streets and "get a little bloody," a Massachusetts Democrat
said Tuesday in reference to labor battles in Wisconsin.

Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) fired up a group of union members in Boston with a speech urging
them to work down in the trenches to fend off limits to workers' rights like those proposed in
Wisconsin.

Anyone who is familiar with, for instance, AFL-CIO President
Richard Trumka, will understand that
Capuano is not being metaphorical when he talks about blood. (And that Wikipedia article
does not give many of the significant details about the blood spilled during some strikes by the
United Mine Workers. Most, but not all, of the blood was spilled by the UMW, not its
opponents.)

Why did the Somali Pirates Kill The Four American Hostages?
This New York Timesarticle
includes some speculation:

It is not clear why the pirates killed their hostages, either accidentally during a firefight or possibly
out of revenge for the Somali pirates killed by American sharpshooters in a hostage-taking in 2009.

(Others have wondered whether the pirates might have had religious motivations, since the Americans
were, from time to time, distributing Bibles and even preaching.)

But I think it more likely that the deaths were, in a sense, accidental, that the pirates did not intend
to kill their hostages. (A dead hostage is worthless, except as an example, and if all of them
are killed, the pirates must have known they would all be dead or captives, soon.)

This paragraph, from later in the article, supplies a clue:

But the talks seemed to unravel on Tuesday morning, when a pirate aboard the Quest fired a
rocket-propelled grenade at the destroyer. Almost immediately gunfire erupted from inside
the yacht's cabin, Admiral Fox said, and several pirates then stepped up to the bow with their
hands up.

Here's my guess at what happened: The pirate with the RPG fired it accidentally. (It
would not be an effective weapon against a destroyer, something even a Somali pirate should be able
to figure out.) One or more pirates inside the yacht heard the shot, panicked, and started
killing the hostages. Other pirates tried to stop them, and were killed.

The Scent Of A Woman: It's not just the name of a
movie;
it's a powerful effect on the actions of men, powerful and
surprisingly subtle.

Each of the young men thought she was simply a fellow student at Florida State University
participating in the experiment, which ostensibly consisted of her and the man assembling a puzzle
of Lego blocks. But the real experiment came later, when each man rated her
attractiveness. Previous research had shown that a woman at the fertile stage of her
menstrual cycle seems more attractive, and that same effect was observed here — but
only when this woman was rated by a man who wasn't already involved with someone else.

The other guys, the ones in romantic relationships, rated her as significantly less attractive
when she was at the peak stage of fertility, presumably because at some level they sensed she
then posed the greatest threat to their long-term relationships. To avoid being enticed to stray,
they apparently told themselves she wasn't all that hot anyway.

At least the researchers assume that it's changes in scent that cause these changes in the
men. And that seems like a reasonable assumption, though there are other
possibilities. (And I suppose it might be interesting to repeat this experiment with guys who
had stuffy noses.)

Thanks To Ann Althouse And Lawrence Meade For Their Coverage Of
The Demonstrations In Madison: If you read their posts, you were much better
informed than if you got your news from the usual talking heads on TV.

If you haven't read their posts, you can start
here,
where Althouse links to highlights of their coverage.

One thing I particularly like about their posts was their effort to be fair; for example, they showed
you some of the extremists you may not have seen on "mainstream" TV, but they also told
you that the extremists were not typical.

Good News, If True: According to this New York Timesarticle,
midlevel Taliban commanders are getting weary of the war.

Recent defeats and general weariness after nine years of war are creating fissures between the
Taliban's top leadership based in Pakistan and midlevel field commanders, who have borne the brunt
of the fighting and are reluctant to return to some battle zones, Taliban members said in
interviews.

After suffering defeats with the influx of thousands of new American troops in the southern provinces
of Kandahar and Helmand last year, many Taliban fighters retreated across the border to the safety
of Pakistan. They are now coming under pressure from their leaders to return to Afghanistan
to step up the fight again, a Taliban commander said. Many are hesitant to do so, at least
for now.
. . .
One close supporter of the Taliban in Helmand Province said that the insurgents had lost 500 fighters
there last year, including virtually all the known commanders. Those who
survived remonstrated with the leadership in Pakistan over why they had to sacrifice so many men.

(Emphasis added.)

Very few men, however fanatical, want to face American soldiers and Marines year after year,
especially when they are commanded by a man like General Petraeus. The Taliban have
resorted to terrorist tactics, especially roadside bombs, because they can not compete on the
battlefield.

So the story sounds plausible, but we have to treat it with some caution.

The Coup In Olympia: The coup in Olympia? Yes, I have
it on good authority that there was a coup in Olympia.

At this point you are probably already protesting that if there had been a coup in Washington's
capital, you would have heard about it by now. Our local TV stations would have mentioned
it, in between more important stories like another crime in fashionable
Belltown, the
rescue of a cat from a tree, or the latest traffic accident on our crowded roads. If you read
the Seattle Times, you would have seen an editorial from their Defeat Now! caucus
explaining why it would be wrong to interfere in the internal politics of Olympia. One way
or another, you would have heard about the coup.

Even if you don't live in this area, you would expect to have heard about the coup, perhaps in one
of those lists of wacky happenings in funny places that many news organizations are fond of running
from time to time.

As it happens, I only heard about the coup last Friday, when I was listening to one of my
favorite radio programs, KUOW's
Gang of Four.
(As I like to call it.)

That mention piqued my curiosity and so, when I had a little free time, I checked out the
post.

I thought it was just my conspiracy theory. Noting that Roadkill Caucus leader state Sen.
Steve Hobbs (D-44, Lake Stevens) was on the supplemental budget conference committee (the
RKC is the conservative Democratic caucus), I theorized that the conservative coup in the state
senate over liberal Senate Majority Leader Sen. Lisa Brown (D-3, Spokane) was complete.

Josh Feit is not quite as clear as he might be, but if you read that post carefully, and the earlier
post he links to, you will learn that some moderate Democrats are — this will shock you
— working with Republicans in the legislature. (Incidentally, Lisa Brown is
better described as a leftist, not a liberal.)

Some of us might think this is democracy in action. The voters showed, in last
November's election, that they wanted a change in policy, even in this very Democratic state.
Legislators, especially those that face real competition, are responding to voters, instead of going
all out to appease the bosses of the public service unions.

But that simple textbook picture isn't what leftist Josh Feit saw when he watched those
events. Instead, he saw something more sinister, a "coup". That word doesn't
tell us much about the happenings in the Washington state legislature, but it does tell
us quite a bit about Josh Feit.

(I hope Mr. Feit will excuse me if I give him a little advice: If he wants to do real, honest
investigative reporting, he would do well to concentrate on Democrats, not Republicans.
That isn't because Republicans are always more virtuous — though their average is higher
— but because Democrats have been in control in this area, for years.
Democrats have had way more opportunities to misbehave — and I don't doubt that some of
them have taken those opportunities.

Otherwise, Feit is likely to spend his time digging up petty "scandals", like the single man who eats
out often. Few, other than the most partisan, will see anything strange, illegal, or even
unethical about that pattern.)

Make Basketball, Not War: Now that the independence of
South Sudan seems a near certainty, some of the young men are turning away from war to something
more fun
(and, for a few of them, way more profitable).

After decades of civil war, peace has finally settled in southern Sudan. The south will soon
declare independence from the north, and with this newfound freedom, the southern Sudanese are
beginning to rediscover themselves, reacquaint themselves with all that has been stunted or twisted
or buried under the weight of war.

Crazy for basketball is part of who they are, or were. Manute Bol, their pioneer, became an
N.B.A. star a quarter-century ago. Since then, many talented players, some driven out of
southern Sudan by the years of violence, have had solid collegiate careers in the United
States.
. . .
Now, though, at the dawn of peace, there appears to be emerging an exuberant re-embrace of the
sport, and with it a second wave of talent to be recruited, prospects perhaps no longer seen chiefly
as curiosities.

It is little short of amazing that this decades-long (or centuries-long, from another point of view) civil war
may finally be coming to an end. That peace will allow them to play basketball — and
do a thousand other things they could not do before.

Warplanes And Mercenary Troops? There are reports that
Qaddafi is using both in an attempt to hold on to power. The first seems nearly certain,
judging by this New York Timesarticle.
The second, mercenaries, is not as well-sourced, but seems
plausible.

And people in eastern Libya told CNN that hundreds of mercenaries from sub-Saharan Africa had
been killed or captured while fighting for Gadhafi. Opposition leaders say they are concerned
that pro-Gadhafi forces may try to retake the area, so the men on the street remain armed.

Tyrants often favor foreign mercenaries when they are worried about their control over their own
country. (Foreign mercenaries are less likely to sympathize with the local population, and
would, in general, find it harder to switch sides.)

But we need to be cautious about all these reports, as the Washington Postreminds us.

It was impossible to verify the scope or precise details of the events unfolding in Libya, an oil-rich
North African nation. Foreign journalists have been denied visas, and Internet access, phone
service and other forms of communications have been largely cut.

(Three different sources, and three different spellings of Qaddafi's name. I'm using the NYT's,
just to be consistent, but I have no idea why they chose that variant.)

Democrats Lost Everywhere Between 2008 And 2010:
That's what
Gallup
found when they analyzed their state-by-state party identification.

Gallup has documented the decline in Democratic Party affiliation at the national level from its
recent peak in 2008 and early 2009. After several years of increasing Democratic affiliation
beginning in late 2005, the current political situation is similar to what it was in the mid-2000s,
when the parties were more or less even.

In fact, every state and the District of Columbia had fewer residents identifying as Democrats, or
identifying as independents but leaning Democratic, in 2010 than in 2008. The greatest declines
were in Rhode Island, New Hampshire, Maine, and Hawaii; the smallest were in North Dakota
and Mississippi.

But Republicans shouldn't get cocky because they now have, at best, a narrow advantage in
national elections. To be specific, with issues and candidates equal, I would expect a
Republican presidential candidate to beat a Democratic presidential candidate by 51-49 or 52-48,
or thereabouts.

(Republicans have that advantage because they are more likely to be voters, and they are
more likely to vote. So, if there are equal numbers of adults who are Republicans
and Democrats, then I would expect Republican candidates to win, narrowly — if everything
else was equal — which it never is.

For decades, in most national elections, Republicans have also been more loyal, less likely to vote
for the other party, which again gives them a small advantage.

One quibble, which I have made before: Since Gallup is combining survey data for an entire
year, they may be underestimating Republican gains. In this case, I don't think
they are, because I think most of the changes happened before 2010.)

Today Benghazi, Tomorrow Tripoli? Anti-Qaddafi protestors
have taken control of the Libyan city of Benghazi, according to news reports.

Benghazi, according to my 2010
World Almanac,
has a population of 1,180,000. The largest city in Libya (and the capital), Tripoli, has a
population of 2,189,000. Since Libya's total population is just 6,310,434, it seems likely that
Qaddafi must hold Tripoli to hold Libya, and must retake Benghazi soon if he is to continue claiming to
be the leader of the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, as the country is officially
called.

(Here's the Wikipedia article on Libya.
You may be amused, but you shouldn't be surprised, to learn that they have a higher estimate of
Libya's population (6.4 versus 6.3 million), but a much lower estimate of Tripoli's (1.7 versus
2.2 million).

Probably no one really knows that the population of Tripoli is, though academic demographers (and, just
possibly, specialists at the CIA) may have more accurate estimates.)

Belgians are not sure, but a lighthearted mood prevailed Thursday as Belgium overtook Iraq's record
in trying to form a government: 249 days and counting.

To mark the occasion, 249 people planned to strip naked in Ghent (though apparently only about
50 people got down to their underwear), while students in Leuven tucked into free frites and
downed beer — Belgian, of course.

Of course. And why not since Belgium is rightly famous for its beer. (I've never
figured out why they like mayonnaise with their fries; maybe they developed the habit before
ketchup was widely available.)

None of the articles I looked at explained why Belgians haven't been able to form coalition
government. My guess, after looking at these
election results, is that
it is impossible to form a Flemish coalition without the
"far right" Vlaams Belang party —
and that the party is considered unacceptable as a coalition partner, because of its racist reputation.
(Which may be deserved.)

And there simply aren't enough Walloons in the country to form a governing coalition. (Belgium
is roughly 60 percent Flemish (Dutch speaking) and 40 percent Walloon (French speaking).)

Most of "Watson's" advantage was in the computer's speed, not its "reasoning". The programming
for the system is impressive, and I would like to know more about how the system works, but I didn't
see anything that I would consider a breakthrough.

(Full disclosure: I have sometimes thought of trying to be a contestant on Jeopardy, or some
similar program, but have always rejected the idea because I know too little about pop culture —
and questions on pop culture are common on these shows.)